Latest news with #SB2390
Yahoo
14-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Two bills focused on supporting North Dakota's rural regions see forward motion in Bismarck
Apr. 14—BISMARCK — Two bills focused on serving North Dakota's rural regions are in the midst of being seen by committees. One, targeted focused on assisting North Dakota's eight regional councils, has been discussed by the Senate Appropriations Committee, while another hoping to create a rural catalyst committee is being seen by House Appropriations. Both bills, and the legislative session in general, have drawn eyes to North Dakota's rural areas and the councils that serve them, said Dawn Mandt, executive director of the Red River Regional Council. "I feel like we're finally finding a seat at the table and trying to be a part of those conversations," she said. House Bill 1524, sponsored by Rep. David Monson, R-Osnabrock, has most recently received an amendment by the Senate Appropriations Committee to alter the nature of its funding to regional planning councils. The bill initially asked to provide $8 million to the North Dakota Department of Commerce to fund regional planning councils, before the funding was reduced to $2.4 million. On Wednesday, April 9, Senate Appropriations amended the bill from specific funding to instead say the commerce department may "award grants to regional planning councils ... to support local and regional implementation of state-authorized programs and initiatives." The amendment was introduced by Sen. Michael Dwyer, R-Bismarck, from the Senate Appropriations Government Operations Division Committee. "We understood the sentiment behind providing some additional support to the regional councils so they could be the local entity to implement all of the grant programs that the Department of Commerce has," he said. The amendment passed unanimously, and the bill received a "do pass" recommendation with a vote of 14-2. Senate Bill 2390, which has been seeking to create a rural catalyst committee, grant program and fund to support small North Dakota towns, was introduced to House Appropriations on Monday, April 7. Sponsored by Sen. Terry Wanzek, R-Jamestown, the bill was introduced by Rep. Donald Longmuir, R-Stanley. Longmuir said the bill would create a rural catalyst committee consisting of one member from each of the eight regional councils, two members at large from the rural communities appointed by the governor, one member of the Legislative assembly, the governor or his designee and the commissioner of commerce or his designee. The committee would have $5 million to support North Dakota towns of 8,500 or fewer, with 50% of the funds having to go to towns of less than 1,500, and the maximum amount of money that can be given through a grant would be 500,000. Longmuir and members of the House Appropriations Committee compared SB 2390 to Senate Bill 2097, which relates to creating a rural community endowment fund and committee, and Senate Bill 2225, which relates to creating a housing for opportunity, mobility and empowerment program. When asked which bill Longmuir preferred, he voiced support for them all, though said if he had to pick, he'd choose SB 2390. "I think 2390 has a better structure to it, in that it's already maintaining some of the things that we already have in place, so we're not creating a new level of bureaucracy," he said. "We're working with assets we already have in place, so we're not tripping on toes." House Appropriations decided SB 2390 will be discussed more at a later date. Mandt, who has provided testimony on both SB 2390 and HB 1524, said it's time to leave the bills in the hands of Appropriations. "We've been on pins and needles," she said.
Yahoo
11-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
ND Senate bill to support towns of 8,500 people or fewer passes on to appropriations
Feb. 11—BISMARCK — A Senate bill that would create a rural catalyst committee as well as a grant program and fund to support North Dakota towns of 8,500 people or fewer was amended and given a do-pass recommendation by the Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Committee on Friday, Feb. 7. SB 2390 was introduced by co-sponsor Sen. Terry Wanzek, R-Jamestown, who said the bill exhibits love and passion for rural North Dakota and its culture. "It's just another idea of how we might be able to provide some assistance in our communities in rural North Dakota and help them become more vibrant," he said. The bill would create a rural catalyst committee, which will assist communities with projects that would improve quality of life, Wanzek explained. It would include two people appointed by executive boards of the state's regional councils, along with a member from the Legislative Assembly appointed by the chairman of Legislative Management, and the state's governor or a designee, as well as the commerce commissioner or a designee. The committee would be supported by the North Dakota Department of Commerce and a granting program would be created, with funds awarded to projects that will "address a critical need in the areas of art and culture, community and economic development, education or health and wellness for a rural community," Wanzek said. The bill's proposed funds would be $30 million. Grant recipients have to provide $1 of matching funds for every $2 they are provided. The Department of Commerce will also submit a report to Legislative Management regarding the program's results, number of requested projects and information on projects that received funds, as well as how many matching funds were raised and how the project affected the community. "I think it's important that we recognize whether these programs work or not, and we need to have data or information on how the grant programs are doing and if they're achieving the purpose that we are seeking them to achieve," Wanzek said. Verbal testimony was given in favor of the bill, though there was one opposing written testimony on the Legislature's website: Sandra Larson of Sheyenne and a volunteer for Sheyenne GRIT, a community development nonprofit, wrote that larger communities would have an unfair advantage over smaller ones. While a city like Devils Lake could pay for a grant writer, she is a volunteer writer for Sheyenne in her spare time. She also asked if the fund is sustainable, as she did not see it being called an endowment in the bill. She said having to match funds upsets her the most. Small-town volunteers working hundreds of hours at bake sales, fundraisers and service projects raise a few hundred dollars at a time, Larson said. "So when a make-or-break community project comes up that costs $300,000, guess how many pieces of peach kuchen Sheyenne would have to bake to raise $100,000?" she wrote. Sen. Mark Weber, R-Casselton, also voiced concern over smaller towns getting the same help as larger cities, in response to testimony given by Dawn Mandt, executive director of the Red River Regional Council. "When we have some of these towns, some of them that are not even incorporated, but call them a village, 50 people, 100 people, I want to make sure that they aren't being left out," Weber said. Mandt said regional council assistance is not based on town size, but community needs and people helping themselves. Weber's concern could be addressed through program design, and the quality of projects is a differentiator on what is done, she said. Boots on the ground are needed to help get projects done. Weber said sometimes, small-town residents might not know of programs that could help them, and they could be educated about them, to which Mandt said regional councils can connect them to the programs. She also included in her testimony that the bill was created to help small towns get funding for important projects that often don't qualify for other state programs or federal programs. "Every day we hear from small-town leaders, 'Are there any grants for this project?' " she said. "There is a lot of pent-up demand for small-town projects." To ensure some of the funding goes to small towns under 1,000 in population, the committee added an amendment that 50% of the catalyst funds would be designated to towns of fewer than 1,000 people. Following the amendment, the committee voted unanimously on a "do-pass" recommendation.
